About Me

Tuesday, May 10, 2011

How is this fair? The Upper Deck Redemption Saga....

continues.

Some of you agree with me, some of you don't. Some of you think I am being an ass, what if the shoe was on the other foot?  Doesn't particularly matter one way or the other but I do appreciate the support.  Others of you are telling me this is my fault due to purchasing a product with expired redemptions.  Although the expired Topper redemptions have fallen at a rate of 75% for me.  Not true according to the Upper Deck Twitter Master....my ACTUAL results beg to differ.  BTW, to recap my expried redemptions are 3 Jeter Toppers, 3 Griffey and 3 Cal Ripken as well as a Jeter Strokes of Genius.  Not exactly chump cards or chump change.  I know that the cards were made and that Upper Deck has them as they have been giving them out.

Upper Deck told me there was nothing they could do expired, nothing left because they don't have a baseball license, blah blah blah.  Mind you have dropped $6k plus into 2007 Masterpieces.

Well today I was perusing my freedom card board PM's and noticed a comment that led me to this post:

So I ask you, how is that fair? So I fired off an email to Chris Carlin:

Chris,

Quick question.  Why does this happen http://freedomcardboard.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=132299

And I get nothing.  I've pulled 3 ripken toppers, 3 jeter topper, 3 griffeys and a jeter strokes of genius expired redemptions in the last 3 months.  This is really unfair.

7 comments:

White Sox Cards said...

It's a fair question. I hope you do get more than a prepared statement answer. I'm not a big fan of redemptions to begin with, but that Ultimate card just adds salt to the wound.

the sewingmachineguy said...

You said, "they have been handing them out". What do you mean? Where?

stusigpi said...

They have been handing them out as replacements over the last 6 months.

Paul said...

Upper Deck should at least be consistent. I don't think they should have to honor expired redemptions, but if they are going to take care of some, they should take care of all.

beardy said...

Dude, please don't get me started again. I'm still miffed about the expired Mauer BTL auto that they first said they would honor in a month, and then changed their mind about and told me I was out of luck.

There's a reason why I've stopped buying boxes, and pretty much stopped blogging as well. I AM PISSED OFF!

People have told me it's my fault for buying older products as well, but I'm not trying to hear that noise. As you said, what if the shoe were on the other foot?

beardy said...

I assume you saw this months ago, right?

http://upperdeckblog.com/2011/02/ask-ud-expiration-dates-purchasing-exclusive-signings-ivan-vishnevskiy/#comments

I've tried twice now to post a link to my Mauer expired redemption post, but they keep refusing to accept it. Hmmm... wonder why?

Offy said...

While everyone is quick to point out that the card are expired and that whoever pulls them shouldn't get a thing, no one ever wants to admit the fact that a company including so many redemption cards isn't doing their job properly. When all of the stars from a set of case hits are redemption cards then why even include them in the first place?

Then there are the people who incorrectly state that these cases are priced so low because the redemptions have expired. I bought a box of this back when the redemptions were still active and paid right around the same price. This product was a flop and there were a ton of cases sitting around. They're beautiful cards, but Upper Deck was way off on the price point. When you are paying $4 or more for a pack of 4 cards people are going to balk when a box only has a couple of hits.

Then there's the fact that Upper Deck undermines their own stance on the matter. They tell you that they can't do anything and then you find stories here and there of UD going against their word, You'll find someone who recent got the card you were supposed to get or someone with an older redemption card that was honored. I don't get the reasoning behind it either.